Holden Captiva Maxx v Mazda CX-7 Luxury 2007 Comparison

Plenty of people purchase an SUV for the perceived lifestyle benefits. If the TV ads are to be believed, a multi-purpose vehicle opens the door to a life of adventure sports and weekend getaways. In fact, the reality is likely to be far more mundane: hauling shopping, strapping kids into child seats, grinding out the daily commute, and so on. But regardless of where fact and fiction collide in this particular scenario, what is increasingly true is that buyers want style with their substance, and blandorama wagons are sooo yesterday while sporty SUVs are - like, totally - the new black.

In 2006, compact and medium SUVs accounted for 14.3 percent, or just over 137,000, of Australia's new-vehicle sales that year. Not surprisingly, a growing number of car makers want a slice of that pie, with the latest players being Mazda and Holden with the CX-7 and Captiva, respectively.

Mazda's CX-7 is one of the more extroverted examples of the recent trend to weave sports-car styling with SUV DNA, and call it a 'crossover'. The Captiva Maxx follows a similar philosophy, but is also an intriguing example of GM's increasingly global focus, being the result of collaboration between Holden and GM-Daewoo. In fact, the Maxx is a Holden-badged Opel Antara, designed and sold in Europe, but built in Korea. Go figure. It's also the range-topper of the local Captiva range, sold alongside the SX, CX and LX models, which in turn were penned by Aussie designers Mike Simcoe and Max Wolff. Though designed on different continents, both Antara/Maxx and Captiva share identical underpinnings.

The Mazda CX-7 and Captiva also have their mechanical similarities, both being underpinned by a strut front and four-link independent rear suspension. The CX-7 suspension is an amalgam of Mazda 3 and Mazda 5 bits - the latter is not sold here - while the Captiva gets its own, all-new architecture. Both cars also employ similar on-demand all-wheel-drive systems that mostly drive the front wheels, but which can also send up to 50 percent of drive rearwards when sensors detect wheelspin.

Under the bonnet, the CX-7 uses a modified version of the direct-injection 2.3-litre turbo four-cylinder found in the hot MPS versions of the Mazda 3 and 6. The engine's technical gizzards remain largely unchanged, but the CX-7 gets a new Hitachi-Warner turbo and different ECU calibration, designed to better match the car's extra kilos and its Aisin six-speed auto transmission. Outputs are 175kW at 5000rpm and 350Nm at 2500rpm, or 15kW and 30Nm down on its sporty stablemates, but both peaks are delivered at 500rpm lower.

Motivation for Maxx comes from a 3.2- litre, naturally aspirated version of Holden's Alloytec V6, built at the company's Port Melbourne plant specifically for the Captiva. Like the 3.6-litre High-Output Alloytec that powers certain Commodore models, the engine features variable camshaft timing on the inlet and exhaust valves, and a variable intake manifold. The result is a respectable 167kW and 297Nm, just 2kW down on the Maxx's 67mm longer-bodied Captiva stablemates, due to a different exhaust system. Like all Captivas, drive is channelled through an Aisin five-speed auto.

The power gap between CX-7 and Captiva isn't immense - a fact borne out by standing-start performance testing at Oran Park. Here, the Mazda recorded a 9.0-second 0-100km/h time, with the quarter-mile marker flashing past in 16.4sec. That's decently rapid for this class of vehicle, and easily dispatches challenges from the likes of Toyota's RAV4 and Nissan's X-Trail - which each take more than 10sec to 100km/h. In fact, the only soft-roader capable of showing the CX-7 a clean set of hoops would be the turbocharged Subaru Forester XT, with a 7.0sec to 100km/h time.

The Captiva maintained a respectful distance on the trip with a 9.5sec 0-100km/h time and a 17.9sec 0-400m split, but its ingear response left much more to be desired. Left in 'Drive' for the 80-120km/h rolling acceleration run, the CX-7 posted a brisk 5.8sec, more than a second quicker than the Captiva, which suffered from sluggish kickdown, a sizeable torque deficit and a slightly peaky power delivery. Obviously, having one less cog in the gearbox didn't help matters either. First blood to Hiroshima, then.

With the numbers nailed, we headed for the open road where the CX-7 backed up its dragstrip dominance with eager throttle response and willing urgency. Nail the accelerator and there's a rapid, linear swelling of pace which almost belies the car's 1771kg kerb weight. While the engine is a worker, much of the credit here must go to the first-class auto and its well-chosen ratios. Turbo lag is practically a non-issue and kickdown response proved swift and effective, instantly dropping ratios in response to the right foot.

The Captiva's reactions to the throttle felt dull and blunted by comparison, and here the gearbox is the villain, not the hero. The Holden's auto proved annoyingly obstinate during hard driving, frequently refusing to kick down when you wanted it to, and taking any sign of throttle-off as a green light to upshift. The slightest lift had the auto grabbing a taller gear, then steadfastly refusing to drop a cog, regardless of how hard you nailed accelerator. On good roads where you wanted to string together a flowing sequence of corners, the auto's inadequacies proved extremely frustrating.

Delving deeper into the rolling hills of the Kanimbla valley in western NSW, the Maxx's chassis performance also came in for some unfavourable scrutiny. Over typically scarred and pitted rural tarmac, the Captiva exhibited a disturbing lack of body control, especially from the rear end. As the designated sports variant of the Captiva range, the Maxx gets its own damper calibration and stiffer front strut springs, but even this didn't appear to help as larger bumps and dips turned it into a rolling, bouncing handful. Larger impacts pounded the suspension into the bump stops, transferring the blows into the cabin with violent force.

The undisciplined suspension performance was exacerbated by slow, inconsistently-weighted steering that kicks back when loaded up in corners. Even on smooth roads - where the Maxx exhibits good grip and a basically neutral cornering stance (albeit with a tendency to understeer) - the car's lethargic throttle response and excessive bodyroll blunt the fun. Considering the time and effort Holden claims to have put into tuning the Captiva for Oz conditions, we expected better.

The Mazda, on the other hand, is something of a handling revelation, at least in SUV terms. Its body control is nothing short of outstanding, the suspension swallowing all but the largest cracks and corrugations in one controlled oscillation. Add to this its seamless, on-demand all-wheel-drive system that quickly detects a loss of grip and sends drive rearward almost imperceptibly, and you have a very sure-footed bit of gear. The well-weighted steering is quick and incisive, and the chassis surprisingly adjustable. Lift the throttle, brush the brakes and CX-7 bobs its nose tighter into the turn.

Of course, all that weight, height and ground clearance can't be completely disguised, with bodyroll and understeer inevitable companions when probing the limits. The difference is the CX-7 resists both better and, as a result, you enjoy the drive a lot more. Of course, a big part of the attraction of softroaders is their perceived ability to leave the bitumen and hit the dirt - although in both these cases the absence of low-range gearing and a full-size spare should temper off-road ambitions. But the dusty yellow tracks of Sunny Corner State Forest, between Lithgow and Bathurst, provide the perfect dirt playground; the surface is basically well graded, with the odd hump and divot here and there to keep things interesting. Here again the CX-7 stamped its dynamic superiority, proving sweetly balanced and entertaining. The ESP system can't be disabled above 30km/h, which would ordinarily make us wince, but in this case it's well tuned to allow mild dirt drifts without electronic histrionics. The Maxx, too, was surprisingly capable on dirt, or perhaps that's just the dirt-road hoon in us.

While the CX-7 is smoother, faster and much ore entertaining, you pay for it at the pump. Over 500km of varied conditions, the Mazda slurped a V8-like 17.0L/100km - and it only drinks expensive 95RON. The Captiva returned a more acceptable 14.7L/100km on a diet of regular 91RON.

In standard specification, our contenders come well equipped, keeping each other honest with ESP, climate control, eight-way power adjustable drivers' seats, leather trim, cruise control, and six-disc stacker sound systems (although the CX-7's nine-speaker Bose system is the aural champion). The Captiva gets handy roof racks, but the CX-7 counters with rear parking assist and a trip computer. The Holden has hill descent control, the Mazda six airbags (front, front-side and curtains) to the Captiva's four (front and curtain bags).

Against the tape the Captiva cedes 110mm in overall length to the Mazda, which is also 22mm wider and has 43mm more wheelbase. Perhaps not surprisingly, given the CX-7's steeply raked windscreen, the Holden stands 55mm taller. Inside, both have spacious and upmarket cabins. The CX-7's front seats are well positioned and comfortable, the low-set seating position and high cowl feeling instantly sporty, although the coupe-like roofline might create headroom issues for taller drivers. Only a lack of reach adjustment on the steering wheel spoils an otherwise sound interior.

You sit higher in the Captiva but comfort levels are also excellent, even if, like the CX-7, its front seats could use more lateral support. Both cabins are classy and refined, with well laid-out and legible controls, but the Mazda takes a points decision on detail design and quality. Features like the three-piece cylindrical instrument cluster, retro-cool three-spoke steering wheel and suede alligator-print strips down the centre of each seat create a more elegant environment. The Captiva's cabin is somewhat more conventional in design terms.

Slip into the rear seat and things start to come a little unstuck for the CX-7, however. There's no storage space at all, bar a small map pocket behind the passenger seat, and the high-waisted styling means smaller children may not be able to see out so well. The Captiva gives kids a better view, while more storage options equate to more convenience. At least the CX-7's rear seats are a comfortable place to be, thanks to superior under-thigh support, even if knee and toe room is inferior to the Holden.

Trundling back to suburbia, the Captiva's case strengthens - the CX-7's tightly-controlled body movements and firmer suspension translate into a terse and fidgety low-speed ride, while the Captiva's softer suspension is more absorbent. Visibility from the CX-7 is also compromised by the low seating position and high dash, to the extent that it can be difficult to judge where the nose ends when parking.

So, Mazda or Holden? The Maxx is cheaper, more frugal, more practical and more pliable in town - a capable and desirable SUV. But accept the CX-7's ride, fuel consumption and packaging compromises, and you have an SUV like no other. Styled like a concept car yet ready to do the shopping, it offers a rewarding driving experience and special feeling every time you climb in. For us the choice is clear.

To comment on this article click